Have you gone back to standard stereo from surround?

[ErinH]

I've currently got a nice surround setup. I'm happy with it. Over the weekend I did some playing around and noticed that, for the most part, I didn't really feel a huge benefit from surround in the movies we watched (spanning a few genres, but mainly Disney in my house for now).

This got me thinking, and allow an offshoot for a second..

For years now I've wanted some Mcintosh gear. Hold your horses audio-snobs and bashers alike, I'm not of the mind set their gear is sprinkled with pixie dust. For me, it's an emotional attachment and all psychoacoustics rationale. There's a history there that relates to my dad... let's just leave it at that. Obviously Mc stuff isn't cheap. I mean, I sold my Kidney as an attempt at a down payment once and they said it wasn't good enough. The nerve.



So, in all seriousness, I am *toying* with the idea of going to a dedicated stereo setup for my HT. I'd basically sell off everything but my mains/sub/Oppo/6-channel Rane and use the left over cash to get my dream amp/pre. We play a mixture of music/movies. I've been getting more in to the "sneak upstairs for a while and listen to my music" and that's where this inkling of wanting to do something drastic is coming from.

I guess my question to you guys is, although you don't know me, would you throw a HUGE caution flag here and snap some sense in to me, or is this really not such a backwards step? I realize music is primarily 2-channel (I personally no longer own surround mixes of various albums), but when it comes to movies, have any of you gone back to a simple stereo setup and felt it was a fairly painless "downgrade"?

Just looking for a reality check, if needed. I can play around all day with using only 2-channel stereo but when everything is gone, it's not easy to get back. So the decision would be fairly permanent. And there's not much more cash that would crop up anywhere else for me to go back to surround in the future; not as far as I see it.

 

[Cos]

Not a easy question to answer, my question is why not have both? besides the cost
-What is your breakdown of movies to music? What types of movies do you enjoy watching
-Why does it have to be a permanent thing? You can always build back up from two channel, then again the cost?
-Are you not happy with your current L/R Speakers? Do you really believe that McIntosh will make them sound that much better?

I upgraded my speakers because I wanted better two channel sound and was sold on GE HVFR Tweeter. I think I get excellent two channel sound along with great Home Theater. Not to knock McIntosh, but the biggest increase in sound performance you are going to get come from the speakers, emotional attachment aside.

If you aren't watching movies much, or the types of movies that really take advantage of surround sound aren't the types of movies you watch, then maybe 2 channel is the way to go. For me, I watch a lot of action movies, can't wait for Captain America Winter Soldier to come out on Blu-ray and love the smile movies like that and the Hobbit put on my face enjoying the surround effect. If that isn't you, you may have answered your own question.

At the end of the day if all you want out of 2 channel vs. surround is to own McIntosh Gear, that's really up to you, and while I don't see it as a huge advantage, if it's an emotional attachment that is important for you than go for it.

In building my new HT area, I am stealing from my bedroom setup (Triton 7s) and going strictly 2 channel. 75% of the time if I am tired I will watch TV in my bedroom, but if it is a new release blue ray, the HT is where I go.

 

[ErinH]

Thanks for the reply. Most of the questions you posed, I tried to address in advance but you had some good points.

I just want to reiterate what I mentioned in the OP. I'm not at all saying the Mc will sound superior (all things being equal; namely power on tap). The desire to go with Mc gear has nothing to do with notions or illusions audio nirvana. The last thing I care to get in to with this thread is that topic. I'm very much an objectionist when it comes to this hobby (see my sig). So the motivation to own Mc gear has practically nothing to do with sound (other than quality of the product and the psychoacoustic/emotional correlation).

 

[GranteedEV]

I could easily live without surround for movies and of course music's a no-brainer - but I prefer it for games. Hell, that's what got me through the The Fury boss fight in MGS3 and the effect in the underwater area of Folklore is still pretty much my "surround reference".

My advice?

Multiple systems

 

[ImcLoud]

I would tackle this a different way, instead of going with a mc pre/pro and amplifier, ect why not keep your HT how it is and put together a nice 2 ch music system, something that makes you feel nostalgic and fulfills the desire for clean clear music at the same time.. I am not sure what the worth of the HT gear you are going to sell is, but judging by what most used gear is worth I can't imagine it helping with the new investment much...

So in another room add a little 2.0 system that can be enjoyed for music, this way you are not disrupting the tv room and you get the best of both worlds...
you can get a used ma6300 or 6500 for around $2500 Mcntosh MA6500 Integrated Stereo Amplifier 100W x 2 w Orig Box Manual Remote | eBay McIntosh MA 6300 Integrated Amplifier MA 6300 Just a Year Young | Solid state | Fairfax Station, Virginia 22039 | AudiogoN - The High-end Audio Community

then pair it with a pair of speakers you enjoy..

But anyway, I think I would try to do both, a music only system and leave the ht alone..

You can get a decent nostalgic system that sounds and looks excellent

this would be impressive..
McIntosh MC2505 Amplifier in Excellent Cosmetic and Working Condition | eBay
WHARFEDALE DENTON 80th ANNIVERSARY BOOKSHELF SPEAKERS (PR) **DEMO** at Music Direct

with a decent turntable Store - U-Turn Audio you can be well under $2000 and have a nice looking and sounding system....

 

[Steve81]

I guess my question to you guys is, although you don't know me, would you throw a HUGE caution flag here and snap some sense in to me, or is this really not such a backwards step?

Hi Erin,

I ask myself this question every once in a while. My attention tends to be focused on the front stage and big bass effects; I don't pay much attention to surround effects by contrast, so I can sympathize.

However, there are some technical reasons to stick with surround. Having a dedicated center channel helps anchor dialog to your screen for viewers outside the normal stereo sweet spot. It's also easier to boost dialog volume alone if you're so inclined. There's also one other big potential drawback with down-mixing: automatic dynamic range compression. This was talked about a little back in the Dolby Digital days, and kinda/sorta mentioned on the Dolby Metadata Guide. Not sure if it's still an issue with TrueHD, though the reasoning behind engaging DRC wouldn't have changed.

 

[ErinH]

Hi Erin,

I ask myself this question every once in a while. My attention tends to be focused on the front stage and big bass effects; I don't pay much attention to surround effects by contrast, so I can sympathize.

However, there are some technical reasons to stick with surround. Having a dedicated center channel helps anchor dialog to your screen for viewers outside the normal stereo sweet spot. It's also easier to boost dialog volume alone if you're so inclined. There's also one other big potential drawback with down-mixing: automatic dynamic range compression. This was talked about a little back in the Dolby Digital days, and kinda/sorta mentioned on the Dolby Metadata Guide. Not sure if it's still an issue with TrueHD, though the reasoning behind engaging DRC wouldn't have changed.

Thanks for addressing the question. As for the sweet spot, I can live with that trade off. The directionality of the speakers I built was done so with every intention on having a wide radiation pattern so the sounds were spread throughout the room as much as possible. It's not a replacement for center channel, but it's something I can personally live with. I'll chew on this a bit more...

 

[TheHills44060]

In the early 90's I played around with surround, an AV Receiver and a bunch of speakers but that didn't last long. I went to back to 2 channel amp/preamp and have never been happier. I watch tons of concerts and occasional movies on that rig and am very content.

 

[j_garcia]

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/steam-vent/91257-stereo-vs-surround-home-theater-2014-edition.html

 

[Lulimet]

I did go back to 2 channel for a couple of months. I mostly did it because I wanted a new receiver with all the newer features but I didn't have the funds to buy it at the time. So I decided to sell my center speaker and the surrounds to cover the cost of the new receiver.
2.0 was fine for music because I always listen to music in 2.0 or 2.1 anyway, but it wasn't cutting it for movies. After 3 months I sold my Dynaudio S1.4 bookshelves and bought Focal Chorus 5 speaker set. I didn't like them too much so I sold them after two months and jumped in the MB Quart deal and have been happy ever since.

I lost about $250 in the process but I got me a great new receiver and an awesome set of speakers.

 

[j_garcia]

I can be perfectly happy with 2.0 or 2.1 and even 3.1. I enjoy surround, however I don't need it to enjoy movies or music.

 

[3db]

I cannot go back to 2 channel mode for watching movies. There is no way a 2 channel system can physically immerse one in surround sound like 5 speakers can. There are many movies where surround use is limited and for those films, 2 channels will do. However, if you take a movie like Master & Commander where surrounds actually reproduce the hold of a ship realistically, two channels won't cut it IHO.

 

[cpp]

I have a dedicated 2chl and HT. Like anything it all depends on how you set it up. I enjoy movies that are well mixed for surround sound, Dark Knight, Hurt Locker, Wall-E, House of Flying Daggers and Sky Fall to name a few. I tried them in 2 chl, but it just didn't provide the experience I wanted from the film which I got with surround. And surround is kickass for gaming.

 

[ImcLoud]

I have a dedicated 2chl and HT. Like anything it all depends on how you set it up. I enjoy movies that are well mixed for surround sound, Dark Knight, Hurt Locker, Wall-E, House of Flying Daggers and Sky Fall to name a few. I tried them in 2 chl, but it just didn't provide the experience I wanted from the film which I got with surround. And surround is kickass for gaming.

I like them separate, I haven't seen many HT's that are music friendly, first off in a HT you have tons of seating and everyone uses the room, the most comfortable seats are never in the "sweet" spot ect... With a music only system you can set it up with a single seat in the sweet spot, and listen with out the distraction of a tv display... An exception is a freind of mines system, he has a pre/pro for his HT a 3 ch amp {center and surrounds} and a 2 ch amp on his left and right, he then has a stereo preamp with "pass through" so the left and right fronts go through it but he can shut off his pre/pro and his 3 ch amp and run a nice direct stereo signal to his front sides... The system is awesome and he has a recliner rite in the center "sweet spot" with a couch on each side of it and his tv is on a lift that puts it in his attic when it shuts off... My wife would NEVER go for that, lol...
I have to say his system is awesome he has maggie 3.7's with the tri center and mm2's its sick... But that is one out of hundreds of systems I have seen that I think music can be played and well... there are a couple others that were OK and don't get me wrong any system can play music, just to have everything in both packages, that is what you need a separate preamp wired in the right way, a comfy listening position, a dissapearing tv, and then I can get into it...

 

[cpp]

I like them separate, I haven't seen many HT's that are music friendly, first off in a HT you have tons of seating and everyone uses the room, the most comfortable seats are never in the "sweet" spot ect... With a music only system you can set it up with a single seat in the sweet spot, and listen with out the distraction of a tv display... An exception is a freind of mines system, he has a pre/pro for his HT a 3 ch amp {center and surrounds} and a 2 ch amp on his left and right, he then has a stereo preamp with "pass through" so the left and right fronts go through it but he can shut off his pre/pro and his 3 ch amp and run a nice direct stereo signal to his front sides... The system is awesome and he has a recliner rite in the center "sweet spot" with a couch on each side of it and his tv is on a lift that puts it in his attic when it shuts off... My wife would NEVER go for that, lol...
I have to say his system is awesome he has maggie 3.7's with the tri center and mm2's its sick... But that is one out of hundreds of systems I have seen that I think music can be played and well... there are a couple others that were OK and don't get me wrong any system can play music, just to have everything in both packages, that is what you need a separate preamp wired in the right way, a comfy listening position, a dissapearing tv, and then I can get into it...

I do like them separate and the wife does to. That way she can watch TV or a movie and I can go to the man cave and listen to music..

 

[ErinH]

If I had the money to afford different setups, I wouldn't be considering selling off gear to get something else and running stereo.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The only proof you need is right in front of you.

If you change from 5.1 to 2.1 for movies and you still don't miss anything after 6 months, then I think you are ready to sell the gear and buy some McIntosh amps.

I unequivocally think the subwoofer is 100% more important than any surround channels, including Atmos.

I've been doing 2Ch for about 2 months since I'm awaiting new 5.1 speakers. Some movie soundtracks (like DTS) sound much better than others (like DD/PCM) for 2.1.

I definitely miss 5.1 much less when the movie soundtrack is awesome.

 

[3db]

I'm sticking with my arguement. Two channels cannot reproduce the physics of 5 speakers when it comes to sound immersion. I'd rather the suuround channels with tower fronts than a 2.1 channel system.

 

[ErinH]

FWIW, these are the speakers I'm using. DIY 3-ways with Kef Concentric Mid/Tweeter and Scan Speak 10" 26w Revelator woofers.

 

[VicDamoan03]

Interesting topic. Suscribed.